Astro Hacker News - Mortality associated with non-optimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019

eikenberry |next [-]

Maybe we could start adding flags to sites that block browsers with a failed Cloudflare "Security Check".

archived version w/o check: https://web.archive.org/web/20260701193209/https://www.resea...

mrtksn |next |previous [-]

This must be relevant due to the air conditioning meme about Europe. Anyway, sometimes I just like to turn of the AC and enjoy the +30C summer heat at low humidity however I can’t stand +24C when it’s humid. It’s not just the temperature.

cozzyd |root |parent [-]

right the more important function of the AC for me is dehumdification.

groby_b |next |previous [-]

"Sub-Saharan Africa had the highest cold-related excess death rate"

That's an interesting choice. It conflates cold-related excess deaths in the equatorial lowlands (which struggle to ever get below 70F/20C) and the southern highlands (like Lesotho, which routinely goes below freezing in June/July). Both are sub-saharan.

Of course, that may just be a bad summary, but it puts it onto the "should probably verify the results before I trust it" pile of papers, something that's sadly growing at an ever-increasing pace.

marcosdumay |root |parent |next [-]

There are maps if you want details.

aaron695 |root |parent |previous [-]

[dead]

adamddev1 |next |previous [-]

Weird. I remember hearing about how one of they key markers for longevity was exposure to heat and cold.

762236 |root |parent [-]

Acute heat exposure, like 45 minutes where sweat is starting to accumulate on your skin, causes capillary growth and other adaptations some weeks later. If you don't have those adaptations already when exposed to heat, and you're weak, you're going to be in trouble.

EGreg |root |parent |next [-]

Are we distinguishing eustress and distress?

stavros |root |parent |previous [-]

I guess this explains how I could play tennis for two hours in the sun in 35 degree heat (35 C in shade). I guess I'd better not try it again now that I haven't done it for a while.

asdff |root |parent [-]

Couple sessions in the schvitz first perhaps

wartywhoa23 |next |previous [-]

Oh no, brace for the self-heat-insulation and climate lockdowns.

petarb |next |previous [-]

So no cold plunging and then sauna?

readme |root |parent [-]

That's probably still very healthy. The study looks at deaths per year at non-optimal temperatures. Living in a desert is different than taking a sauna.

stephen_g |root |parent [-]

Yeah, I expect it's pretty similar to how long-term, constant stress is correlated to poor longevity, but frequent bouts of short term stress of intense exercise followed by recovery is correlated with good longevity.

Geee |previous [-]

It seems like they use obscure language (non-optimal, excess) on purpose to try to somehow connect global warming into the obvious fact that a lot of people die in cold temperatures if they don't have a warm shelter, and sometimes people die in hot temperatures if they don't drink enough. And the article is full of global warming fear mongering, although they found that temp-related mortality has decreased from 2000 to 2019.

Windchaser |root |parent |next [-]

> It seems like they use obscure language (non-optimal, excess) on purpose to try to ...

Huh. No, in the scientific literature, this isn't obscure language. This is normal language there.

This... kinda comes across like going to France and objecting that everyone's speaking French.

Bjartr |root |parent |previous [-]

What makes that obscure language for an academic paper?

Why is using obscure language a tactic for linking an idea to global warming?

What claims do you feel are fear mongering?

Geee |root |parent [-]

Well, to me it reads as "climate change causes people to die", although the opposite is true and their own results show that. It's obvious because people die overwhelmingly from cold compared to heat.

atoav |root |parent |next [-]

No it is about ambient temperature. Of course climate change would factor into ambient temperature since it is a change of the bell curve that represents the usual day-by-day weather.

It raises the average temperature and makes hot extremes more frequent and intense, while cold extremes generally become less frequent, but they may also move to different places, since ocean currents change. Additionally it also changes precipitation and other weather extremes: a warmer atmosphere can contain more water vapour, contributing to more intense heavy rainfalls or snow for example. However, this does not necessarily mean that day-to-day temperature variability increases everywhere; changes in temperature variability depend on the region and season.

Put simply, extreme weather can mean humidity, perception and wind mix. How these three mix will decide whether the weather is survivable or not. I grew up in the alps and the number of people who have died on mountains because they are unaware of how wind mixed into their cold weather survivability even with decent gear is way too high. See also: https://www.noaa.gov/jetstream/synoptic/wind-chill

That means this isn't nearly as simple as saying: (1) climate change means it is getting hotter on average, (2) that study says more people die of cold exposure, ergo (3) this means less people will die.

The main problem woth this chain of thought is that point 1 isn't adequately describing what happens. If you have read any IPCC report know that the number of extreme weather events is increasing. I live in Europe and this year I experienced both the coldest winter and the hottest summer in my lifetime.

fluffybucktsnek |root |parent |previous [-]

You know climate change isn't just places getting hotter, right?

Geee |root |parent [-]

The article is about mortality related to ambient temperatures. People have always died from ambient temperatures, that's why we have clothes and homes.